About your Search

20121201
20121231
Search Results 0 to 14 of about 15 (some duplicates have been removed)
of omission that would leave us open to foreign attack and invasion. tragically, we can't say the same about attacks on the country's domestic tranquility. what has the congress done to protect the country? nothing. and here's the question. when will we refuse as citizens to settle for, accept, live with a congress that fails to act in the face of such a demonstrated vulnerability? if not now, after this, when? next week? next month? next year? next what? and if not us, who in this world is going to demand action to protect americans? joining me now is u.s. senator dick durbin of illinois. i want to read something from you which is very impressive, and it's in the op-ed pages of "the chicago tribune." quote, what holds us back are political organizations that are well-funded, well-organized, and determined to resist even reasonable limitations. there's a close political parallel between the gridlock in washington on dealing with our economy and national debt and the eerie silence in congress as the list of horrific gun crimes grows by the day. senator durbin, thank you. i know you have got a
? next month? next year? next what? and if not us, who in this world will demand action to protect americans? joining me now is u.s. senator dick durbin of illinois. i want to read something from you which is very impressive and it's in the op-ed pages of "the chicago tribune." quote, what holds us back are political organizes that are well-funded, well-organized, and determined to resist even reasonable limb tathss. there's a close political parallel between the gridlock in washington on dealing with our economy and national debt and the eerie silence in congress as the list of horrific gun crimes grows by the day. senator durbin, thank you. i know you have got a good heart on this as well as a good head about fiscal matters. what's wrong with the congress when it comes to protecting, ensuring the domestic tranquility? >> well, there's a legitimate concern about our second amendment, chris. you understand that part. but there's also a very strong political force that is trying to push forward, primarily for the dealers and manufacturers h an agenda that will sell more firearms and
conservative republicans in primaries because you're setting us up to lose senate seats. now that he's out of there, he can become a kind of cross between grover norquist and the jim demint he always was. he can drive these hard right ideas, but he can also sponsor hard right candidates in republican primaries. i think he thinks he's going to be more important at the heritage foundation than he is in the senate. >> let me ask you about that, john. it looks to me not just -- the money is always a draw for some people, i'm not sure it is here. he would have been chairman of the commerce committee if the republicans had won this fight for the senate. they lost it. is it just one of the things that happens when your party loses, you look for something better to do? >> i think this is better where he's looking for a different platform where he can have a louder voice and concentrate on the issues he wants to. >> he's the chief recruiter on the right. he liked christine o'donnell and he ended up rooting for people pretty hard on the right like toomey in pennsylvania, mourdock, akin. he tried to
night and that's what counts to a lot of us in america. thanks for watching. i'm al sharpton. "hardball" starts right now. >>> knives out on the right. let's play "hardball." ♪ >>> good evening. i'm chris matthews in washington. let me start tonight with this. when a party loses an election, the knives come out. right now we're watching the night of the long knives on the right. these stories breaking tonight. right wing senator jim demint, the man behind too many failed right wing senate challengers, christine "i'm not a witch" o'donnell, richard mourdock announced today he's quitting the senate to run the hard right heritage foundation. meanwhile, in the republican house a purge is under way with speaker boehner dumping uncontrollable right wingers from prize committee assignments. they're out because they're too right. so what is too right for the republicans following the defeat this week or their defeat last month? is voting nay in the senate against a handicap rights treaty because it carries the nightmare dread of blue helmets riding black helicopters sweeping into your home sc
said that the rates don't have to return to clinton era levels. obama's nemesis, as he often told us, are millionaires and billionaires. so why not urge that the higher tax rates be applied only to those with incomes of $1 million and not the couples earning more than $250,000. now, i'm talking pure politics, not equity in this case. can they hang their hat on the fact, okay, you're against millionaires, we'll take back their cut for the millionaires? below that they have to get the deal. >> the problem with this is chuck schumer and other senate democrats tried to offer this to republicans last time. remember the last time we did this, they rejected it. >> it works for them now. they can say all we want is the schumer deal. >> right now they don't have the leverage to get the schumer deal. they rejected the schumer deal. they don't have the leverage to get it. >> here we disagree. i think they may have a case. if the bogeyman is the millionaire -- >> i think that's where it's going to end up. i think that's the flexibility in the negotiations at the end is over whom the higher rates
Search Results 0 to 14 of about 15 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)